A364jncaster Farming, Saturday, March 18, 2000
The custom rates shown are averages from voluntary reports by custom operators and
farmers throughout Pennsylvania. Most of the rates are stated per acre, cwt., ton, bale, or bushel
rather than per hour to reduce the variation due to machinery size. Individual rates vary due to
differences in working conditions, services performed, or even the operator's eagerness to do custom
work. Therefore, the average rates shown should not be considered absolute indications of fair
charges.
Acreage rates are shown separately for two regions of the state, labeled "Mountain" and
"Valley". The differences in rates between regions reflect differences in terrain, soils and
alternative opportunities for the labor and equipment used Figures labeled "State" represent the
straight average of all reports used regardless of geographic location.
Of the 72 rates reported with year-to-year comparisons, 53 increased, 10 decreased, and 9 are
the same as last year The overall average is up 3 percent from the previous year This percentage
increase was computed by adding the rates for all jobs, regardless of basis of charge, and dividing
by last year's comparable total
Custom Rates: Selected Farmin'
Com Peking
ComComblnmg
Com Drying (23 Ptrctnl)
Combining &nal Grains
Combining Soybean#
Hay Making
Mowmg
Mowng i CondAoning
Rakrg
Pick up Balng (Twkw)
Cot,Rah* BalotStoa
Urge Round Balar (Avg -900 Lbs)
Stacks Wagon (Avg . IKO Lty
Wrapping Baios
SOaga Making:
Pud Typo Choppor i Tractor
So* Propelled dropper
1 Mon 2 Wagono,t Tractor
2 Mon, 2 Wagona, 2 Tractors
Field Chop, Haul ins*}
Sagging Slago
Plomng Moldboard Plow-
Spring Stubble
Sod
Fan Stubblo
Sod
Plowing, Ooop (W Inefm or Uert)
Plowng Chnol
Plowing Disk
Delong Tandom
With Harrow or Cuftpaefcer
Harrowing*
Spha Tooth
Spring Tooth
Cultivating
Planting Com WltiFartinr
Conrantontf-TM
RaduortTE
No-TI
Planting Soytaam. WNhou Fftlinr
CorwtndonalTl
Reduced-T9
No-ra
OrifegSmal Grain;
Without Fertfcer
WMiFMizar.
WHtFartbartCkwanaad
SttdhgWlt Clover, Efc
Farmers to Visit Harrisburg In Support of Legislative Goals
CAMP HILL (Cumberland
Co.)-About 300 farmers from
across the state traveled to Har
risburg Tuesday, March 21 to
meet with their state legislators
on issues affecting agriculture.
The face-to-face meetings
with lawmakers took place
during the annual Harrisburg
Legislative Tour conducted by
the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau.
The day’s visits were followed
by a banquet for state legislators
at the Harrisburg Hilton and
Towers hosted by Pennsylvania
Farm Bureau. Guy Donaldson,
president of the farm group, ad
dressed the banquet at the con
clusion of the Harrisburg tour.
“With prices for some farm
commodities at their lowest level
in over two decades, farmers are
looking for assistance from
many areas to help them survive
economically,” Donaldson said.
“Coming off last year’s devas
tating drought and having con
cerns about the growing season
this year has added to the uncer
tainty farmers have about their
future.
Machinery Custom Rates
By Eric D. Stout & Liana C. Cuffman
’Agricultural Statisticians
Bans of Chargo
Mountain Section
Buohoi
Aero
“Farm Bureau members will
be meeting with their state sena
tors and representatives to rec
ommend solutions to the
problems facing agriculture,”
Donaldson said. “The recom
mendations are based on grass
roots policy developed by Farm
Bureau members.”
Here are the issues Pennsylva
nia Farm Bureau members will
be discussing with legislators
during the Harrisburg Tour:
•State inheritance tax. State
inheritance taxes harshly impact
the financial ability of farm fam
ilies to pass the business on to
the next generation. Unlike fed
eral estate taxes, which exempt a
portion of a person’s estate from
taxation, state inheritance taxes
are imposed on the first dollar of
the estate’s taxable value. Pay
ment of the tax, which is as
sessed at a rate of 6 percent for
close relatives and IS percent for
others, is required to be made in
cash. If the farm business does
not have available cash, the
farm family must sell off farm
assets to pay the tax. If land
rations, Penns 1
flvanla, 2000
Vaßay SacJwn
HarvntJng
2300
2570
—— Plowing B Cultivating ——•
■' Planting & DrMng ——
FtodMng „
Grain Hawing;
Local
LongOWanot
QranSloraga
StskShraddng PTO
SpraadngßulkPartizar
QrirdngFMd
Corn Oifc or ferity
Com * Cota-
MacNntTlngptoTlty „
Back Hot .
Sowing Wood. Chain Saw _ _ _
PM Holt Digging
Mm Lot**. Soft*
Mtnwt Sprtadng, SttH
Manurt Pumping „
Manwt Sprtadkig, UqUtf - „
feMaiingphyHP 100)
WAwlnauAdantMa
must be sold to pay estate taxes,
succeeding generations will in
herit farms that are less produc
tive and less able to survive in
the future. Farm Bureau policy
calls for the elimination of the
state inheritance tax. Farm
Bureau members will be asking
their legislators to support legis
lation which eliminates or re
duces the inheritance tax
burden.
•Regional planning and
zoning. Implementation of land
use planning and zoning on a
county wide or regional basis can
significantly impact agriculture.
On one hand, regional planning
can effectively control residen
tial development and prevent
conflicts which may arise when
developments intrude into areas
that were traditionally agricul
ture. On the other hand, unrea
sonably restrictive land use
regulations can prevent farmers
from adopting farming practices
which may be unpopular with
local residents but are needed to
stay in business. Unrestricted re
gional land use planning can
2000 Machinery
Custom Rates
Custom Rates; Selected Farming Operations,
Broaden* Sa**ng (On Grail FmUs)
Ctaaning Grain Saad
WHhTmfrnant
WWwdTraaanant
Ground Equfcmunt
Spraying tor Waad ConW
Exdudftg Malarial
SprayhgforComßotar
IneWng Coat of Malarial
Eadudtag Coat o( Malarial
Sprayhg-torSpMi MgorAMiWNvr
Induing Coal of Malarial _
CnlulngCoatolMiMaL
Liquid
SktoDrwaing
Cobt .
AddMontlChtrgt lorMbdng
also prevent a farmer from de
veloping a portion of the farm if
he or she decides to do so. Re
gional planning legislation, S.B.
300, has been amended in the
Senate to address several con
cerns voiced by Farm Bureau.
The amended bill is now in the
House. Farm Bureau is asking
representatives to oppose any
effort to remove the amend
ments which protect agricul
ture’s ability to make future
changes needed to remain com
petitive.
•Local income taxes. Recent
interpretations of state income
tax laws would require farms to
report as “business income” all
income that is generated from
interest on business assets, sales
of farm livestock, and sales of
farm machinery. Income from
many of these assets is not re
quired to be reported as business
income under federal law. Since
many municipalities and school
districts base “earned income”
tax liability on state, rather than
federal, “business income,”
farmers will pay more local
Penns!
Ivanla. 2000. Continued
BaaiaofCharga
Mountain Saction
Planting A Drilling (ConUnuad)
* Buahal
Buahal
Spraying
—— UacaUanaow
Bwhal
Buahal
Buahal Bar Worth
Hundrtdwtighl
■ I -J.-A -I. ■ .
nunortowtigni
HuKfetdwtighl
Hundrtdwtight
ValaySacbon
income taxes. If municipalities
and school districts increase
local income tax rates, which is
allowed under the “homestead”
tax reform, farmers will be
paying even more in local
income taxes. Farm Bureau is
supporting S.B. 390 which
would require local tax authori
ties to follow federal guidelines
in computing income subject to
local “earned income” taxes.
The bill has passed the Senate,
however its support has been di
luted by amendments relating to
amusement taxes added in the
House. Farm Bureau wants the
Senate to pass a version of S.B.
390 that accomplishes its goals
for changing local income tax
laws.
•Tort reform. The U.S. civil
justice system has created the
attitude that anyone who sues
can make large sums of money.
As a result, more and more
people are bringing marginal,
frivolous and even fraudulent
lawsuits in an effort to get rich.
Lawsuit abuse has clogged our
(Turn to Pago AST)